When I can afford a decent car again it’ll start with an S as a manufacturer

Seat, Ssanyong and Suzuki have come a long way in the last few years, but even so, I’m not sure I’d aspire to any of them…….Saab are dead so you can’t mean them, Smart have mouldered, and Subaru have gone backwards with their range.

So it’s down to Skoda.

Wow. Worthy, I agree, but there are so many other cars that I’d go for ahead of them.

Indeed, unless your work requires the use of a firearm, I can’t understand why anyone would actually want to own one these days.

We could do this all day, but as a (multiple) shotgun owner, I’ll simply say that I enjoy developing the the skill required to hit tricky clays. It’s a pastime, nothing more. Sure, people can use a legally-owned firearm for illegal things, but that’s the same for so many things.

BTW, Gav, if you’re anywhere near to Hertfordshire and fancy some 12-bore at my club, feel free to contact me.

So it was running cold for most of the time.

Yep, it certainly was. The point is that the same journey – from cold – in my Passat would get me a 10mpg (or 25%) improvement, so it’s a fair enough comparison. If anything, it’s favouring the smaller engine, which will presumably warm up a good deal faster.

That’s another thing to add to the North/South divide then, as it’s not the case down here.

1 bed flat, value £220,000
Rent £750 month
Mortgage at 90% LTV, 30 years, interest only at 4.5%, £825 month

so even with 10% deposit renting is cheaper.

Really? You’re assuming no rent increases in that, which is unlikely over a 30-year period.. Although interest rates on a mortgage can and and do vary, they’re tied to a capital cost that you’ve fixed now. Any wage inflation over the period will very quickly reduce the effective cost of the mortgage.

And, of course, you’ve got the property at the end, which you clearly never will when renting.

I’m probably quite good at this since I’m used to driving the 1.4 turbo (got to use the torque like a diesel – go over 3k rpm and the fuel economy drops markedly), and mange to match the suggested combined mpg for the car (which is a miracle frankly – never managed that in any other car – previous fords have been well below the official mpg, which is partly why I’m suspicious of the mpg figures given for the 1.0 ecoboost).

I think you’re right – treat it as a low-revs car, drive it like a diesel, ad you might (note: that’s might) get closer to the official numbers, but frankly, I doubt it. And anyway, if you have to drive it like a diesel, why not *get* a diesel; for all it’s cleverness, the 1.0 I drove had nowhere near the low-down punch of modern 1.6-2.0 diesels, all of which would be a lot quicker in ordinary driving. It feels swift if you rev it, but if that hammers the ecomony, what’s the point?

I used to work at Ford, and had any number of fleet cars from zero miles (the joys of Frog Island!). I never saw that much of an improvement as miles went on, though being fair, most went back with just 5-6000 miles on them. Unless this engine’s very different, I’d still expect it to be an at-best 40mpg car on average. Not bad, obviously, and a far cry from the 25mpg average you used to get from petrol cars even a decade back, but still a good deal less than you’d get from a Focus 1.6 TDCI – they get over 50mpg as a real-world long-term average.

That said, it’s waaaaay more refined than any diesel (BMW 730 and Audi A8 V8 aside) I’ve driven.

You’ll get far worse economy than with, say, a 1.6 diesel, but it’s a nice thing to drive, it has to be said.

I managed to get 40mpg on a 10-mile drive, on which I’d normally get around 50mpg from my Passat. New car, might improve a bit with running in, but I doubt it would change much.

It certainly didn’t feel like a 1.0 engine – subjectively, it was at least as quick as a 1.8 petrol Focus I drove a year back, and it revved nicely. Overall, very nice, just not very economical; as that’s its main purpose, it seems a bit pointless.

“Shifting paradigms on a daily basis” is, I think, some variant of “we do three impossible things before breakfast” and sounds incredibly butch, if utterly stupid.

I heard “winnovation” used in an entirely non-ironic sense by our ex-CEO, and had to bite my tongue. He’s one of those stereotypical humourless Americans who smiles a lot then fires you.

“Has he got the MIPS?” foxed me. It’s a dreadful IBM phrase relating to how clever someone is perceived to be, and makes me gag. Used extensively at my place.

(can’t resist heckling here, sorry!)

Try harder, eh?

(a) I’m not great with sharpening steels

(b) the women in my household seem to think that the same knife can be used to cut onions, tomatoes, concrete and wire (yes, really) without any ill-effect, and that chopping directly onto a granite surface is just fine.

I’ve got a remarkably nice electric knife sharpener – as ever, not cheap, but it works perfectly, doesn’t grind your knife away in seconds, and means I don’t have to spend ages with a steel getting the knives perfect after my daughter has carved rocks (or whatever she does with them) with my favourite knives.

I paid about £100, I believe.

http://www.zwilling.com/en/knife-series/items/four-star–2628.html?page=3

I’ve got several of these in differing sizes, some with a concealed tang, some with it exposed (i.e. riveted heads). Just brilliant, though not cheap.

Always been partial to Britney’s Stronger and Girls Aloud’s Not Tonight Santa. I know, shoot me.

To be fair, all roadies are miserable……..

Yes the actual distinction between 4wd and 2wd isn’t really the issue – the issue is of excessive size, poor fuel efficiency, bad driving, and greater danger to others.

So to summarise, you argument comes down to: Big cars are bad. You shouldn’t drive them.

Fair enough, and it’s a perfectly reasonable point of view. Not one that I share, but that’s by the by.

Though, if we’re going to be critical about the way people live, we really need to do it properly. Ban flying (totally discretionary use of fuel), ban old houses (more fuel to heat), ban large families (consume resources), ban mountain biking (utter waste of resources), ban skiing (I mean, all that power to get you up a hill? Just so you can come back down?).

Why just fixate on someone’s car? There’s a whole world of disapproval and righteous quivering anger to be had as you tut at the way other people live.

The point of the matter is that all things being equal the 4×4 is more likely to have an accident and the outcome of that accisdent is likely to be worse for the victim.

The vehicle doesn’t cause the accident, the driver does.

In two decades of driving 4x4s I’ve not an an accident in one. I might have one in the future, sure, and if I get into an accident it’s possible that it would cause more damage than if I were driving, say, a Twingo. But there are a lot of variables in that, aren’t there.

I’ve got a Discovery 3, one of the biggest cars on UK roads, though it’s actually got a slightly smaller footprint than an E-Class, and I don’t hear of people militating to ban them. It gets used off-road probably once a month, goes to the Alps four times a year, and carries logs, dogs and bikes all the time. If everyone could get past the fact that it’s a 4×4, they’d be OK. Look at instead as just a 30mpg car, albeit one that can go just about anywhere and carry lots of stuff..

If you want to have increasing levels of rage based on the CO2 output of cars, knock yourself out. But if you’re going to be fair about it, you really have to have a go at just about anything petrol-powered (a 2.0 Mondeo’s no more frugal than my car, driven in the real world). Take a look at the real-world fuel consumption of the £0 road tax Fiat Twin-Air (officially 70mpg, in reality more like 35), and realise that having a go at 4x4s is prejudice, pure and simple.

Don’t like the Bromptons. Use a Trek and a Dahon Mu SL. In both cases, XTR brakes, decent tyres and better bar/saddle make a massive difference. The Dahon creaks a bit every three months, at which time you lube all the parts and hey presto! the creak disappears.

If you have the space, why not?

Then again, it’ll never be as nice to drive, as economical, as quiet, or as safe as your Mercedes C270.

If you see it as just another cheap car, then don’t bother – use the Mercedes. If, on the other hand, you have a perverse attraction to mustard/beige cars and love that whole Swedish style, then get it bought.

Me? I’d not bother. I had a 245 for a while (and a 265 a bit later) and they were the Toyota of their day – efficient, solid, and dull. And really, really thirsty – even the 245 (a GLT, no less) managed no better than 22mpg as an average, and far worse on short trips. Better than the competition at the time, but that was a long time ago.

I enjoyed my two (had them in the late 80s), but I drove a 244 a couple of years back and was amazed at just how dated it felt.

what the funk is CMX?

It’s like BMX but turned up to 11

I’ve got the 3g keyboard version. Quite nice to be able to get a new book when you want to (on a train, being driven, etc) and always to have email access. Very slow connection, but good enough to get by.

The Kindle screen is the best bit – no problems with reflection, and easier to read even on the brightest beach. Other thing to consider is that you can alter the font size very simply, which my father-in-law finds incredibly useful – can read on the beach without the need for his glasses.

I loved my Passat, but the electronic handbrake was a PITA. It once failed to come off when trying to disembark a ferry. Mortified.

It’s the one glitch on an otherwise excellent car. Cost £70ish to fix the parking brake switch though, so no massive problem. On ‘just’ 140k on my TDI Passat, costs have been basically service items, other than the fact that I recently had to have the brake calipers rebuilt. At 6 years old I can forgive that.

Still original clutch, turbo, exhaust, wheel bearings…..it just runs. No warning lights (other than when it’s out of washer fluid or on the odd occasion when a headlight bulb or the like has failed).

Jamie, looking at the list of recommendations makes me feel a bit ill. Barack Obama? Arnold Schwartzenegger? Not for me, thank you.

Though the Viz one may be of interest…..

Fair enough Cougar – I agree that I am a bit negative about it, but mainly because what I’ve seen (and admittedly, I’ve not spent a massive amount of time digging in) has been trivial at best.

The quotes I put up earlier were all from 2 minutes of Twitter-browsing, and, as you say, these are all just people, whose daily lives may well be just as humdrum as my own. It bemuses me that people whose output is admired (Stephen Fry is a good example) are followed on Twitter and almost deified when they post. But 5 posts today on the fact that he’s flying to the UK from NZ to Edinburgh? Not what floats my boat, but he’s got 4m+ followers. Astonishing, genuinely astonishing.

Tell you what, I’ll ignore the ‘celeb’ Twitterers and see if I can find things of value. I’ll pop back in a bit.

Why are you reading this thread? That’s what I don’t get. If someone started a discussion thread about football(*) then I’d just ignore it. I wouldn’t jump on there going “I don’t get football, bunch of blokes kicking a ball around for 90 minutes, big whoop.” It’s not constructive, and it’s a waste of my time. Oddly, I’d rather talk about things I’m actually interested in.

Perhaps I’d like to be convinced? After all, Twitter’s supposed to be a two-way thing, much as this forum is. As an outsider, I’m surprised at the huge number of re-tweets which seem to emanate from institutional sources, and which, at least to me seem to add little other than text.

Obviously I’ve taken things slightly off-topic. That happens on this forum. You clearly think I’m wrong to question the orthodoxy that Twitter’s a good thing, but I remain of the opinion that Boris Johnson tweeting “Good luck to all the Home Nations playing today!”, or Jeremy Clarkson tweeting “Four amazing goals from Chelsea. One was especially amazing” just doesn’t add to the sum of human knowledge. Alan Sugar’s pronouncement of “Have to sympathise with people who lost family or friends at hand of murderer Breivik to sit through court case and listen to his rubbish” is no more profound for having come from a businessman than it would be from a cabby, or my sister.

So I ask again, what is it about these pronouncements that makes them so worthwhile? Or are the Big Hitters to be avoided on the basis that they’re a waste of time?

For myself, it allows me to keep up to date with family and friends around the world, be able to get instant reaction to events, whether sports/news, find out info quicker etc etc

That’s my point though – I don’t want or need to know those instant updates from sports people or news events, and if I do, I have a radio, TV, the BBC website…..things that I opt to use, and update myself on.

As for instant updates from friends and family, words fail me. Do I really need to know that my brother’s just fitted a shower? Do I really think that he’d tweet about it?

As a follower of F1, I want to see a balanced summary of a test session, rather than Lee Mackenzie tweeting “Lee McKenzie ? @LeeMcKenzieF1 Close
I work closely with @HorseCharity World Horse Welfare. Always very sad to hear horses dying in any equestrian genre.”

Brilliant. Thanks Lee. You like horses, but why the f*** do you feel the need to comment pointlessly on something that you have no professional interest in, nor can in any way impact. At least you managed to take up a few seconds of time to make yourself feel better though, and that’s the main thing, isn’t it? Just next time, keep it to yourself.

Genuinely don’t get Twitter. I mean, I completely understand the purpose, but I’m not interested in anyone enough to want to hang on their every word and be updated on each pronouncement they make.

Luddite? Probably. But I just can’t be bothered to invest any time at all in the world of celebs.

The Buzzcocks

From Northumberland so I was going for Hadrians Wall, but be generous and say the M62, Manchester et al are the midlands

Agreed that the Mancs and Scousers are far from Northern, and I’ve always taken the view that the Mackems are like your annoying younger brother that you have to accept really are part of the same family, despite not understanding how this could have happened.

Durham marks the start of the South. Going the other way, after Rothbury it starts getting a bit bag-pipey.

You may then break free in the same sense I may become a fluent french speaker but it is very very unlikely.

so you were brought up an anglican in an anglican household then rather than a jew or a muslim in an anglican household…how exactly is that countering my point?

It’s countering your point by making you aware that people – including me – can quite happily break away from a religion on the grounds that they think it’s bobbins. And, contrary to your view, a lot of people ‘break free’; look at the decline in the number of people attending places of worship in the UK. The tradition is (literally) dying out.

Religion is not harmless.

Amen to that.

Bin it and buy a Henry Miele.

I did this about six years back and have never missed the Dyson. Bags last for ages, and are very cheap on eBay, and the brush picks up dog hair that the Dyson could never have dreamed of.

You have a choice …..really what % of jewsih people have jewish children?
Muslim people have muslim children et

As it is not what we would expect form random it would appear you dont have a choice any more than you choose which language you speak…it is a choice made for you by someone else.

You may then break free in the same sense I may become a fluent french speaker but it is very very unlikely.

Not really.

I was brought up in an Anglican household, was an altarboy, chorister and crucifer, and can debate Christianity with you until the cows come home. As I got older I started to question the beliefs of my not-that-strict church and by my 20s had rejected them all.

I think it’s fair to say that I’ve fully broken away from Christianity (and, indeed, from any form of religion, organised or otherwise).

Blackberry has worked for me for the last seven years. I certainly didn’t miss my Palm all that much when I replaced it.

I don’t think religion in itself is bad, I just think that current western religion has inherited dogmatic flaws that it needs to move away from. It needs to become more flexible. Overall I think my stance is that religion has to change and become more flexible in it’s beliefs if it is to survive the 21st century, it needs to basically cut and paste the good bad bits and stop worrying about “sticking to the word of god” in it’s entirety but hey. Maybe a bit of “our father”, adam and eve, hellfire + brimstone and a little more teaching about how to love one another. Again opinions.

Whereas I do think religion is bad; essentially it’s been a system of control to manage the masses for many centuries. The Big Bloke In The Sky says you must do what he says, I’m his chosen representative, so follow me as you’d follow him. So long as sufficient credulous people believe that The Big Bloke exists, you can get away with it.

Other belief systems are available (hello Karl) but if you look all the way back to the very first humans, the leaders have always allied themselves with religion. This has really only changed in the last century in the Westernised democracies, but even now, you’ll not be elected in America unless you profess to a belief in The Big Bloke.

Read the OP again. You have read it haven’t you ?

Yep. Drivel, mostly.

I’ll support anyone’s right to a view, but that doesn’t mean for an instant that I support them. Or that I like them. Or that I’ll refrain from challenging them.

speed – simply this; they’ve invited themselves to my house, to tell me their views.

On the couple of occasions this has occurred, there’s been an attempt to explain why I need to hear the word of God. I could either say, “Not really for me, but thanks anyway” or I could say what I really think.

As they’ve come to my door, I’ll go with the latter, to demonstrate to them I’m not apathetic, I’m actually genuinely opposed to their views. I find it quite creepy that these people end up preying on some of the weaker folk i the world, and I despise them for their view of mankind. I certainly don’t see them as “nice Jehovah’s Witness ladies”; far from it.

In the same vein I have always failed to understand the animosity and hostility shown towards Jehovah’s Witnesses, and how apparently some people slam the door in their faces. It’s rare for Jehovah’s Witnesses to knock on my door but when they do I am always touched that they should have made the effort to try to save my soul. They could instead just sit at home watching the telly, condemning my soul to rot in hell.

Whereas I see them as people who have been brainwashed and need to wake up from their slumber. I find it offensive that people who I consider to be mentally unbalanced should knock at my door to tell me that they’re right, and I’m wrong. I don’t shout at them or abuse them in any way but I do ask them to leave immediately, and absolutely refuse to take any of their literature.

Bear in mind that these are people who do believe that they’re better than you – as they see it, secular society is effectively operated by Satan (no, I’m not making this up), and they (and only they) are the ones who are the true worshippers, with all other religious people being the worshippers of false prophets. They try to avoid contact with we non-JWs for fear of contamination. Oh yes, and the world was going to end in 1914. When it didn’t, that date was revised to 1975. When that also failed to be the end of the world, they just conveniently stopped talking about it.

Still think these people should be listened to? Fair enough, it’s your time after all. But I think most people are correct to consider the JWs as crackpots at best and dangerously misguided ones at that; if they come to my door I’ll not hold back in telling them, politely, that I think their views are utterly stupid.

Bubion with Switchbacks, on a run called Grumpy French B******* (they’d run into this bloke several times, it seems)….I was going faster and faster down a very rocky path, wondering just what damage was being done to the downtube by the flying scenery, until I got to that state of speed when you absolutely know that momentum is your friend and that you’ll get through/over all the obstacles, regardless of how large they are.

All done in February, with the sun on my back, when it was rubbish weather back in the UK.

Glorious, just glorious.

Less topics to the page means more pages – and therefore more ads being served up…

Les? LESS? It’s fewer, not less….aaaaaarrrghhh!

Madness have a new album out?

I posted something before which somehow got eaten by the forum.

Long story short, I did a spreadsheet and on the basis of your mileage, and assuming 40mpg car/60mpg bike, and adjusting for service costs, tyres, chain/sprocket/fuel, I got to a running cost of around 21ppm for the car, 22ppm for the bike.

Essentially there’s almost no cost differential. Note that I’ve ignored depreciation and replacement costs; bikes don’t wear their miles as well as cars.

You’d do better just to slow down and try to get another 5-10mpg from your car. 5mpg would save you £500 per year